Cannot argue with any of the points brought up by the author at all. That being said, "main" is a better name for that branch, especially for people new to VCS. The change would've been worthwhile on its own without the expectation of a standing ovation.
It's fine to think "main" or "trunk" or whatever is a better name, it's very easy with git to use a branch with whatever name you like. The issue I and others have (and I appreciate you aren't saying this in your comment) is we don't agree that "master" is "problematic" at all.
at an older company we used main. then we created master and development. and the master/main branch was set to development. good luck to anyone inspecting that repo!
